Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 27 Feb 2011 (Sunday) 10:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Wedding Camera

 
hieu1004
Goldmember
Avatar
3,579 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Seattle
     
Feb 27, 2011 17:47 |  #31

SuzyView wrote in post #11925297 (external link)
Back on topic: I think in the forum we often applaud the 5D or any FF camera for professional work. The truth is, those cameras make wide images possible in ways a 1.6 crop camera can't easily. The main reason why we, as pros, have a variety of gear, the best we can afford, is to do our jobs faster and more effectively. In the hands of a true artist/pro, any decent camera will do the job. But the gear makes the job easier and therefore, allows us to earn more money/hour because of the PP time.

Yes, that's the truth. The photographer makes the biggest impact, but the ideal tools make the job easier. If you are doing this for professional, there is no reason you shouldn't have the ideal tool to leverage your abilities.


-Hieu
Gear | Blog (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
SuzyView
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
32,092 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 129
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Northern VA
     
Feb 27, 2011 17:50 |  #32

Hieu, you have mostly primes. I wish I had that confidence. But the 5D2 and 7D are amazing tools. I feel like I won the lottery every time I take those babies out of their bag. :)


Suzie - Still Speaking Canonese!
5DIV, SONY a7iii, 7D2, G12, M100, M50, 5 L's & 2 Primes, 25 bags.
My children and grandchildren are the reason, but it's the passion that drives me to get the perfect image of everything.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Feb 27, 2011 18:47 |  #33

form wrote in post #11923640 (external link)
Crop cameras have benefits of extra "effective" reach, greater "effective" DoF, and higher "effective" magnification for minimum focus distance. These are all useful in the right hands.

No crop camera can use a 24mm f/1.4 lens and get the same wide perspective with the same narrow DoF and low light capabilities as a full frame camera because there are no f/1.4 lenses that are effectively 24mm when adding the crop factor. No crop camera can get the same framing and have exactly the same image at the same aperture setting as a full frame camera.

That's true, but from a photographer's perspective, it's not the aperture that matters, it's the depth of field. And that's probably what you really meant here.

For a given framing, a crop camera will simply not be able to match a full frame camera's ability to generate a shallow depth of field. If you need a depth of field that shallow, nothing other than a full frame camera will do.

But that's only if you really need such a shallow depth of field. The types of shots where you'd need that and couldn't get it with a crop camera appear to be limited primarily to ultra wide angle shots, where the primes that make that possible exist for full frame cameras and not for crop cameras.

For everything else, it's a question of the selected lens, and that's obviously going to be different for the full frame camera than for the crop camera.


Full frame will get you more flexibility than crop, so if all else were equal, full frame would be the way to go for sure. But Canon has ensured that not all else is equal (particularly with respect to autofocus).


That doesn't really address the original question, which is whether or not a crop camera is suitable for shooting a wedding. It most surely is, as you yourself know because you were quite successfully shooting weddings with a crop camera for some time before you got a full frame body. You can argue, perhaps, that it wasn't sufficient for you and that's what motivated you to go full frame, but I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that your clients were ecstatic with your work when you were shooting with just a 40D. I saw some of the work you did back then and no client in their right mind would be anything but overjoyed with it.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PeaceFire
Goldmember
Avatar
2,281 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Glendale, AZ - Chico, CA - Duluth, MN
     
Feb 27, 2011 19:20 |  #34

If you know how to work your gear you can rock a wedding using anything. I have a friend who shows up with an XTi and takes some breathtaking pictures!


My Gear List / My Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ziffle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,896 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Big "D" - Texas
     
Feb 27, 2011 21:50 |  #35

HKGuns wrote in post #11924318 (external link)
No, he did not -Feel better now? He was sitting in the pews with everyone else. No, it was not direct flash, it was diffuse, bounced flash. How could you possibly have that wrong?

because it look like direct flash....

HKGuns wrote in post #11924318 (external link)
-Your snide remarks set aside, the couple loved the shots I took and in the end that is what counts.

I suppose I could have staged a shot in natural light with the bride's teeth in a compact mirror, but that would take a level of professionalism and talent very few could ever hope to attain. Yes, it would look the same with a crop or FF camera too.

and your last statement is what some wedding shooter go for, including me.
i am still learning, but delivering consistent - high level photography to the newly married couple is what it is all about.

There are shooter who run cropper on wedding day. We do just fine thank you.

It is the grey matter behind the glass that makes a difference.

I would say the images put up are under exposed ..... IMHO ....
Nothing personal HK ... just a different level of expectations.

Later,
Mark


_______________
Wedding Photog's rule ........... just not sure what???
--
Gear List ~ VIAweddingPhoto(DOT)co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,802 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2566
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Feb 27, 2011 21:57 |  #36

Ziffle wrote in post #11926709 (external link)
I would say the images put up are under exposed ..... IMHO ....

I tend to agree...all shots brightened about 0.6EV

(images removed)


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HKGuns
Goldmember
Avatar
1,469 posts
Joined May 2008
     
Feb 27, 2011 22:03 |  #37

Wilt wrote in post #11926752 (external link)
I tend to agree...all shots brightened about 0.6EV

Who gave you permission to modify my images and re-post them?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,802 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2566
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Feb 27, 2011 22:04 |  #38

HKGuns wrote in post #11926780 (external link)
Who gave you permission to modify my images and re-post them?

Sorry, I had assumed you had post Image editing OK...images removed


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Feb 27, 2011 22:06 |  #39

Chill pill anyone? :lol:

Silly discussion quite frankly. A capable photographer will be able to use a cropper or FF camera, period.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
macroshooter1970
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,493 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Arizona
     
Feb 27, 2011 22:07 |  #40

He almost blew a gasket.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Feb 27, 2011 22:10 |  #41

HKGuns wrote in post #11924318 (external link)
No, he did not -Feel better now? He was sitting in the pews with everyone else. No, it was not direct flash, it was diffuse, bounced flash. How could you possibly have that wrong?

-Your snide remarks set aside, the couple loved the shots I took and in the end that is what counts.

I suppose I could have staged a shot in natural light with the bride's teeth in a compact mirror, but that would take a level of professionalism and talent very few could ever hope to attain. Yes, it would look the same with a crop or FF camera too.

You proved one thing though. Yup, cropper or FF, doesn't matter at all. It comes down to knowledge. Knowledge that shooting at ISO800 1/300 is NOT the way to go.

:lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dithiolium
Senior Member
697 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Singapore
     
Feb 28, 2011 00:04 |  #42

shooting at 300mm perhaps?

I started shooting weddings with an XTi @ ISO800. Back then felt self confident.
Then 40D and now 5DII. I compare my pics with back then.... and wonder how I could accept those 'back then' pics.


Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis of a government
Gear List / Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Feb 28, 2011 00:11 |  #43

dithiolium wrote in post #11927364 (external link)
shooting at 300mm perhaps?

I started shooting weddings with an XTi @ ISO800. Back then felt self confident.
Then 40D and now 5DII. I compare my pics with back then.... and wonder how I could accept those 'back then' pics.

300mm? :lol:
Exif says 58mm @f2.8, which probably means a 24-70L.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jjmc1025
Senior Member
Avatar
262 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Feb 28, 2011 13:39 |  #44
bannedPermanent ban

nicksan wrote in post #11926833 (external link)
You proved one thing though. Yup, cropper or FF, doesn't matter at all. It comes down to knowledge. Knowledge that shooting at ISO800 1/300 is NOT the way to go.

:lol:

haha


7D - 60D(sold) - 24-105 F/4 L - 70-200 F/4 L - 50mm 1.4 - Tokina 12-24mm - 430II ex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
0.0f
Member
179 posts
Joined Apr 2011
     
Apr 05, 2011 13:30 |  #45

so which lens would be best suited for a 7d shooting a wedding 17-55f2.8 or 24-70f2.8, i am shooting a friends wedding next week and was thinking of hiring one of these lens and will use in conjunction with my 70-200f2.8.


EOS 5D MK3 - 24-70 MK2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,220 views & 0 likes for this thread
Wedding Camera
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is svakomnet
940 guests, 254 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.